Purpose Worry is an intuitive sense that goes beyond logical reasoning and is valuable in situations where patients’ conditions are rapidly changing or when objective data may not fully capture the complexity of a patient’s situation. Nurse anesthetists’ subjective reasons for worry are quite vague as they are valued inconsistently and not accurately expressed. This study aimed to identify factors playing a role in the emergence of worry during anesthesia practice to clarify its concept. Design Mixed-methods design consisting of quantitative online surveys followed by qualitative focus group interviews including Dutch nurse anesthetists. Methods Both quantitative and qualitative thematic analyses were performed, followed by data and methodological triangulation to enhance the validity and credibility of findings and mitigate the presence of bias. Findings Surveys (N = 102) were analyzed, and 14 nurse anesthetists participated in the focus group interviews. A total of 89% of the survey respondents reported that at least once have had the feeling of worry, of which 92% use worry during clinical anesthesia practice. Worry was mentioned to be a vital element during anesthesia practice that makes it possible to take precautionary actions to change the anesthetic care plan in a changing situation or patient deterioration. Conclusions While a clear definition of worry could not be given, it is a valuable element of anesthesia practice as it serves as a catalyst for critical thinking, problem-solving, clinical reasoning, and decision-making. Use of the feeling of worry alongside technological systems to make an informed decision is crucial. Technology has significantly improved the ability of health care providers to detect and respond to patient deterioration promptly, but it is crucial for nurse anesthetists to use their feeling of worry or intuition alongside technological systems and evidence-based practice to ensure quick assessments or judgments based on experience, knowledge, and observations in clinical practice.
LINK
In dit artikel worden drie modellen besproken waarbinnen het concept kritisch denken geplaatst kan worden. De modellen van Benner (intuitie) en Hammond en Eraut (rationele raamwerken)komen aan bod. Het biedt opleidingen een raamwerk om kritisch denken binnen de opleiding te positioneren. De modellen zijn complementair aan elkaar.
Frontline professionals such as social workers and civil servants play a crucial role in countering violent extremism.Because of their direct contac twith society,first liners are tasked with detecting individuals that may threaten national security and the democratic rule of law. Preliminary screening takes place during the pre-crime phase. However, without clear evidence or concrete indicators of unlawful action or physical violence, it is challenging to determine when someone poses a threat. There are no set patterns that can be used to identify cognitive radicalization processes that will result in violent extremism. Furthermore, prevention targets ideas and ideologies with no clear framework for assessing terrorism-risk. This article examines how civil servants responsible for public order, security and safety deal with their mandate to engage in early detection, and discusses the side effects that accompany this practice. Based on openinterviews with fifteen local security professionals in the Netherlands, we focus here on the risk assessments made by these professionals. To understand their performance, we used the following two research questions: First, what criteria do local security professionals use to determine whether or not someone forms a potential risk? Second, how do local security professionals substantiate their assessments of the radicalization processes that will develop into violent extremism? We conclude that such initial risk weightings rely strongly on ‘gut feelings’ or intuition. We conclude that this subjectivitymayleadto prejudiceand/oradministrativearbitrariness in relationtopreliminary risk assessment of particular youth.
On a societal scale, the ‘problem with work’ is that everyone is exhausted, job security has been replaced by ‘flex work’ and much important work had been invisibilised. While billions of people are displaced and illegalized from work, others have physical/ mental conditions caused by work. The problem with work merits scrutiny not only from medical, corporate or legal perspectives. It needs tackling without an agenda of productivity, with an open regard and embodied, intuitive research. Artistic research has this scope. It taps into knowledges that are underused/repressed, by involving the body, harnessing intuition, experience and situatedness, and activating a plurality of voices. The aim of this research is to gain a deeper understanding of what is (not) work, who we are when we perform work, and when we don’t or are not able to work. Why are certain activities or roles called work and what happens when the term is applied to activities that are not normally deemed work, but which include comparable elements? Three research questions are addressed: 1. What can be learned about work by regarding every job, or all the work, as a performance? 2. What can be learned about performance (art) by looking at it through the lens of work? 3. What are ethical practices in collaborative and participative work processes? The research is carried out through an artistic approach that contains a particular way of making, teaching and researching which is collaborative, performative and transdisciplinary. It proposes the body as a thinking apparatus, experience as a way of gathering information and doing, writing, exchanging and performing as both method and dissemination. This research aims to contribute to a better understanding of what work is in our lives. The research has social, artistic and educational targets and target groups, which are also intertwined.
